Read the full judgment text of HCMC 4/2019 on BabelCite. This High Court CFI judgment was delivered on 24 June 2022 before Hon Au-Yeung J.
Ancillary relief – Matrimonial property – Gambling loss – Add-back order – Lump sum award – Matrimonial Proceedings and Property Ordinance – Pre-marital assets mingled with matrimonial assets – Indulgent gambling – Post-separation loans – Wife awarded 50.5% of matrimonial pot – Husband ordered to pay lump sum of HK$292,000,000 – Former matrimonial home transferred free of mortgage – 30-year marriage – SEHL restaurant business – MIL and WEL family businesses – Gambling loss of HK$96.59 million added back – Post-separation loans of HK$90 million not shared – Court declined to order liquidation of companies – Split adjusted to reflect Husband's risk of monetization – Wife to receive former matrimonial home free of mortgage – Costs awarded to Wife – Parties separated in 2014 – Divorce petition filed in 2017 – Trial on ancillary relief held in October 2021 – Judgment delivered in June 2022 – Court found pre-marital assets became matrimonial due to mingling and integration – Court found gambling was wanton and reckless dissipation – Court found Wife not liable for post-separation loans – Court ordered lump sum payment in tranches over 18 months – Court ordered transfer of former matrimonial home free of encumbrances – Court awarded costs to Wife – Court applied LKW v DD five-step approach – Court found MIL and WEL were family wallet and springboard for SEHL – Court found Wife contributed to SEHL despite limited involvement – Court found Husband's gambling loss was 20% of matrimonial pot – Court found Wife disapproved of loans via WhatsApp and 2017 Promise – Court found Husband failed to account for loans except for specific items – Court found no evidence of Brother's litigation risk – Court found Husband bears risk of monetization – Court found Wife should not bear mortgage burden – Court found 50:50 split adjusted to 49.5 to 50.5 due to asset types – Court found Taiwan properties and Daughter's account were gifts – Court found Insolvent Companies valued at nil – Court found frozen meat stock valued at agreed amount – Court found Husband's contribution to SEHL was significant but Wife's contribution treated family business – Court found Husband's gambling was indulgent not recreational – Court found Wife condoned gambling during marriage but not post-separation loans – Court found Husband's explanations for gambling loss not credible – Court found Husband's explanations for loans not credible – Court found Husband's request for 60:40 split rejected – Court found Wife's request for 50% split adjusted to 50.5% – Court found Husband to bear stamp duty and conveyancing costs for home transfer – Court found Wife to transfer shares in SEHL to Husband – Court found no need for special provision for OW's shareholding – Court found examination-in-chief generally not permitted in civil proceedings
Legal issues: Matrimonial Property Issue · Gambling Loss Issue · Loans Issue · Form of Award
Outcome: Ancillary relief granted; Wife awarded lump sum of HK$292,000,000 and former matrimonial home.
Cites 4 cases